<p>Hi, this is my first post here. My daughter got a perfect score, 2400, on her SAT and a perfect score, 36, on her ACT. </p>
<p>She is a junior. She took her first SAT on January 28 and her first SAT on Feburary 11. Both are her first try and she did not take any test preparation classes. </p>
<p>I am really happy for her. Her friends and schoolmates are not at all surprised and said the perfect scores were expected. I am writing here to show off a bit. I guess I am not very modest today. My daughter is smart and loves science very much. </p>
<p>On the other hand, I worry a lot about paying for those expensive private schools that she likes, as those only offer need-based aid, not merit scholarship. The middle class families seem to be out of luck for getting financial aid, not poor enough to go to school for free or rich enough to pay over $200,000 cash for four years of education.</p>
<p>If this is not a ■■■■■, congratulations. Maxing both the SAT and ACT puts your D in a select class. First, if your D is selected for NMF there are some schools that offer full tuition for that. There are also some great schools with full tuition scholarships for top scores and GPAs like U Alabama.</p>
<p>“The middle class families seem to be out of luck for getting financial aid, not poor enough to go to school for free or rich enough to pay over $200,000 cash for four years of education.”</p>
<p>You know, I thought this was true when I first started searching, but now I think it’s probably better to have more money in nearly all situations (applicable only to paying for college, of course).</p>
<p>The full- and half-tuition scholarships at USC are primarily merit-based from what I heard, so that’s just one really good school your daughter can get a full ride at.</p>
<p>Even though I’m not gonna straight-up say that this is a ■■■■■, the readiness of many CCers to believe some things that are more-likely-than-not false makes we question how smart the people on this forum really are… lol</p>
<p>I don’t know why people say “smell a ■■■■■”. I regretted posting the message to let out my emotions, both joy and frustration. It is not a bad thing to get perfect scores for both of these important tests. </p>
<p>We did some searching for private merit scholarships, and most of them require qualities such as having exceptionally strong “leadership”. She is in the National Honor Society, but to qualify for those private scholarship, she has to be an exceptional leader in community services, etc. What is wrong with not wanting to be a strong leader? To make a society work, there have to be leaders and many many non-leaders. Why are most of the merit scholarship gear towards leaders? How many great scientists are community service leaders? What is wrong with being a good leader of yourself, i.e. be a good student, do a good job as a student?</p>
<p>Congratulations to your daughter. Receiving both a 36 and a 2400 is very rare (probably a few dozen a year) and something to be proud of.</p>
<p>It’s important to note, however, that this combination will not significantly improve her chances in college admissions over having a single perfect score, which in turn does not yield much benefit over a near-perfect score.</p>
<p>As in highly selective college admissions, it is important in almost all merit scholarship considerations to have extracurricular experience that demonstrates an applicant’s capacity to contribute to campus and thereafter to leverage his or her education for society. In order to make an impact, a strong degree of initiative and the ability to work well in a team or better yet lead it (even research scientists have to interact in teams, lead others, and persuade their colleagues) are important. Extracurriculars that support an applicant’s possession of those skills are thus helpful; being a leader of some sort in high school is a good way to do this.</p>
<p>I don’t know of any major scholarship programs that award grants on the sole basis of one’s scores, except for perhaps some public universities’ objective scholarship scaling programs. If an applicant has only great scores and grades and hopes to get into a very top university or earn a full-ride to a highly ranked school, he or she must be a truly extraordinary academic (in math, for instance, an IMO or at least MOSP qualifier) to get in on that merit alone. </p>
<p>Best of luck to your daughter. Whether or not she is able to get into and comfortably afford the college of her choice, I’m sure she has the talent and drive to succeed in her chosen field regardless of the undergraduate institution she attends.</p>
<p>Thank you for the great message, Silverturtle. There is a lot of truth in what you are saying. Leadership is indeed an important attribute in every walks of life. There is no doubt about it. A lot of the winners of those private scholarship do things like fundraise to buy books for third world elementary schools, or go to other countries to volunteer, or establish a website for a cause, etc. All those deeds are noble and great, but very difficult to compete with. Compared with those, being a leader in a math team, a school project, or even an initiator of some community service actities look like nothing. How much time and effect can you kid put in to create opportunities to show his/her extrodinary leadership? Looks like the public universities’ objective scharship is more attainable.</p>
<p>She should have little trouble getting accepted to any tech/engineering college in the country. Now, whether they’d shower merit money on her is anyones’ guess.</p>
<p>Without major awards or a strong research background, Caltech must be considered an exception to your claim – in addition to MIT of course, because its admissions practices are holistic in the manner of other highly competitive schools, like HYPS.</p>
<p>Caltech, MIT, Harvey Mudd, and Cooper Union are all extremely selective, particularly Caltech and MIT. Your daughter will need a lot more than perfect test scores to get in. (I think she would have a better chance than most applicants though, females are given in edge in admission to engineering/tech schools)</p>
<p>I think you could be wrong Silver Turtle. A strong research background at such early age may not be necessary. </p>
<p>This is the age where students must learn the existing knowledge. Those who can learn what already exists have a much better chance to innovate later on. Those who don’t really understand fundamental science - may do google research and create a innovative project - but likely never be able to reach the frontiers of innovation that will turn into anything useful. </p>
<p>If you see China and India - these countries are extremely merit based and have been producing better results than the US. Also if you see scientific temperament in US till 1980s it has largely been merit based. Since then, Managers (those who are not doers) have brought in Leadership to justify there own ascent on the value chain.</p>
<p>A lot of Leadership at the age of 15-17 is meaningless as the children have not reached that level of maturity where they understand themselves and the science they are dealing with. Just a lot of drive and passion to do something good is a virtue but it is lot easily done than to work hard at studies and score perfect marks or to be a leader in real life situation (which requires a lot of grit and inner strength).</p>
<p>Also good leaders, in the past have usually come out of the underprivileged lot - because the hardships had such a profound impact on them. One has to go through a lot of perseverance that makes someone a leader. These days there are businesses that will send you to a charity mission in Africa, charge big bucks for it and it will shop on your resume. It is easy to start a club at school than to go in slums in underdeveloped countries and live there and help out). What is really lacking is that most high schoolers are into Leadership because they need it for college application.</p>
<p>Also note that merely having good leaders is not sufficient. You also need good followers and their goodness can only come from the sincerity of the leaders. </p>
<p>If universities truly want to reward the Leaders they must go through their contribution and intent with a lens in their hands and a rare few would be selected. I would agree if some such demonstrated leadership was give a little weight in the application among other personality traits. </p>
<p>On the other hand, those students who have worked hard upon themselves and persevered do actually have the potential to one day inspire others to follow them.</p>
<p>@hnedmuqin, I’m kind of in the same boat. I only got a 2070 on my SAT, but got accepted to MIT. Problem is, I’m also in the middle-class with no financial aid. MIT doesn’t give any merit-based aid either…</p>